Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 638 SO2D 452 - State v. Smith

State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
February 2012
most recently cited

14 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · State v. Oliveaux · State v. Weiland · 338 So. 2d 584 - State v. Crosby · Kissinger v. Halperin

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The defense has the burden of asserting the basis for its motion to suppress. LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 703 E. The state is entitled to adequate notice so that it will have an opportunity to present evidence and address the issue. Defendant is limited on appeal to the grounds articulated at trial. A new basis, even if meritorious, cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. State v. Johnson, 389 So.2d 372 (La.1980); State v. Stokes, 511 So.2d 1317 (La.App. 2nd Cir.1987), writ denied, 516 So.2d 129 (1987).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.